Is America becoming Socialist ?

[monkybuttface]

Let's just give this what it deserves, true communism, the utopia theory, WILL NOT WORK, at least not unless humanity changes it's hard coding. We are not designed for complete cooperation, eventually someone will decide they do not like being given food rations, eventually someone will decide they don't want to be a cashier their whole life, eventually people will decide they want to COMPETE, because for better or worse we are capitalists by nature, it is what has allowed us to become what we are today, on top of that, as according to my beliefs, take it or leave it, we are sinful, we naturally want to have it our way. And before someone says anything about how people naturally want to have communities, and that communities make us strong, well duh, we are social creatures, in some ways socialism is part of us too. We were designed for survival, and banding together against that which would kill us keeps us alive, we are contrasting creatures, and perhaps this contrast is healthy, after all if it weren't for our social tendency we would have anarchy (the truest form of democracy and capitalism) and if it weren't for our capitalistic tendency we would not have the competitiveness that has lead to our great achievements of engineering. In the end, no matter what way our individual governments go, we will always have the clash between free will, and structure/ The clash between the drive to be better than everyone else, and the desire to have others be with you. Perhaps the only way we can truly be what we are meant to be is if we strike the place of perfect balance, where people strive to be better, and people strive to better others. And perhaps when we reach this place we will only stay there a small while, before the one of our conflicting instincts gains the upper hand and knocks us off, I think this is what is happening in America today, we were coming close to that place, but now socialism has gained a stronger following, and is dragging us in it's direction. I also believe that the capitalist side will soon gain dominance, and counteract this movement, or at least slow it. Perhaps we may reach this point, perhaps we will be dragged right over it and become close to anarchy, perhaps we will devolve into socialism and have to climb back up, there is no telling. Will America become socialist? Perhaps, perhaps not. I think in the end it will not matter, because the will of the people is far too unstable.

[Aurielius]

Health Care is worth the extra taxes. Heck, taxes should be like this:

If a person is rich, their taxes goes up and if they are poor, the taxes goes down. Enough so that the poor person doesn't get charged much and lives NORMALLY while the rich man gets charged a lot because he has enough money to pay for all that and still live well.

 

I highly doubt that you have ever run, owned or been in charge of a business. It is easy to give away what is not yours to begin with. Just what should be considered 'rich' ? So by this reasoning if I make something out my business and accrue wealth through my own effort then I should support the poor and indigent just because they are so? Who defines what is a normal standard of living for the poor? By that reasoning then the poor should want to have the same standard of living as the middle class, this country was never based on a free ride, not in it's inception or in it's progression to this point in time. The only thing America has ever guaranteed is a freedom to compete and excel by your own effort. The redistribution advocates are always willing to give away what they did not create. If this is how you feel, then amass wealth then give yours away in any altruistic fashion that you choose, just stay out of my pocket.

[DarkZerker]

If the rich can afford land with that much property built up, than they can pay 200% more taxes or so. The problem with the Bush administration is the lack of that, equality among the people. By equality, I mean everybody pays THEIR share of their taxes depending on their social status.

 

The only problem with this idea is the definition of poor, middle class, and rich. Mostly, an income per year could solve this problem with something like this(JUST AN EXAMPLE, NOT SUGGESTING ANY REAL NUMBER).

 

$50,000 or Lower, Poor

 

$60,000 - $150,000 Middle Class(remember, the ones at the bottom of this chain would pay less. All depending on money)

 

$150,000+ Rich(remember, a person who gets a million dollars a year doesn't pay as much as a person who gets ten million dollars a year.)

 

Communism is a good idea on paper but when put into practice, total communism is a fail. But this idea is employed by nearly EVERY European country and parts of Asia until idiot politicians removed it.

 

"So by this reasoning if I make something out my business and accrue wealth through my own effort then I should support the poor and indigent just because they are so?"

 

If you make over a million dollars a year, I think you should be able to pay 20-30% of that to the government and have enough to buy that epic Plasma Screen TV with X-Box 360 Elite complete with a copy of Call of Duty Modern Warfare 2 :). All kidding aside, this is much better than, "PAY FOR HEALTH CARE WITH YOUR OWN MONEY, WE DON'T CARE IF YOU'RE POOR"

 

The horror movie, Saw VI shows SO many flaws during the tests Jigsaw gives the Health Care official and Sicko shows even more flaws. It's a good movie, since it's directed my Michael Moore, who(thank you)isn't a conspiracy nut and actually DOES research. He never intentionally suggested a demolition during 9/11 and he didn't make up some New World Order BS on Sicko.

 

"If this is how you feel, then amass wealth then give yours away in any altruistic fashion that you choose, just stay out of my pocket."

 

Conservatives are the reason why America is dying. I personally despise those people BECAUSE they are conservatives. Do you think this is what our founding fathers wanted? For America to slowly die and be over taken by the remaining two super nations(China, Russia)? I don't think so...then why are conservatives still alive? I mean, don't you think that Natural Selection would have weeded the idiots out?

 

"By that reasoning then the poor should want to have the same standard of living as the middle class, this country was never based on a free ride, not in it's inception or in it's progression to this point in time."

 

The poor would have a similar LIVING status as the Middle Class but makes either little or a lot less. That's why in order to determine the cost of taxes for individuals, we must look at their yearly paycheck, or monthly, whatever you think is better.

 

America was never based on a free ride? Well it was never based on religion and look at what they're doing right now. Before you flame me...it was only an example. America wasn't BASED on lots of things and the constitution was written in a time when Health Care was limited to unsanitary doctors and hacksaws with those little wooden blocks you bite on.

 

"or in it's progression to this point in time."

 

BECAUSE POLITICIANS MADE IT THAT WAY! If politics never existed and instead elected presidents in a similar fashion that communists elect their chairman(voting within the population WITH no term period, instead based on what you do in that time you are chairman), then maybe the US would fare better. After all, total communism is very rare with only one country(that I can think of at the moment)using it. China and Russia have communism of GOVERNMENT, not the market. Well at least China...

[ginnyfizz]

When did the Conservatives use the police to attack peaceful protesters?

Well they still have their chance!

 

Wasn't police brutality during the 80s a running theme, yes police during thatcher administration is apparently guilty of brutality. and kicked the poo out of pole tax protesters. wasn't there a big thing about this at the time? you can probably pull up news paper articles and all sorts

 

They were not peaceful protesters, like the miners - they were throwing bricks and bottles and worse. I don't need to pull up articles, I was alive at the time. Looks like Ghogiel has fallen for the left wing myths.

 

And no, I do not try to draw unfounded conclusions about the subject of universal healthcare, because I have lived with it for 50 years. And it's a fine Utopian idea again...that simply doesn't work. Let's look at your argument, Lady Milla about

 

"The rich who can afford expensive medicine shall live, and the poor who are obviously all losers, workshy scroungers, and social misfits shall die unless they have a family that can scrape together enough money to pay for the treatment? Because, if your reasoning is true, soon only the wealthiest will be able to afford medicine and operations that require advanced technology."

 

Apart from the fact that your language is rather insulting, for I spend my working life trying to help the poor who have no jobs, and by no means do I regards them all as workshy losers, although a few of them are. Your argument falls down because, in our system of so called universal healthcare, it is already happening that only the rich can guarantee what treatment they need, when they need it. Because some health authorities will pay for certain drugs and operations, some won't, and the licensing authority will not allow the NHS doctors to use new and potentially life saving treatments.

 

Meh, I can see that obviously practical experience of something is not regarded as valid by most of the contributors in this thread. I speak from experience of what I talk about. I am talking about FACTS, not theory, but I can see that doesn't cut any ice with the lovers of theory.

 

Oh I nearly forgot, Lady Milla. Yes, the new Government does propose to encourage local authorities to get rid of speed and surveillance cameras, including the ones in your trashcans.

[evilneko]

The horror movie, Saw VI shows SO many flaws during the tests Jigsaw gives the Health Care official and Sicko shows even more flaws. It's a good movie, since it's directed my Michael Moore, who(thank you)isn't a conspiracy nut and actually DOES research. He never intentionally suggested a demolition during 9/11 and he didn't make up some New World Order BS on Sicko.

 

Right. I'm sure. Because Michael Moore just has so much credibility, you know? Remember that you're talking about a guy who uses the same dishonest tactics as the worst of the science-denialists on the far-right. Moore is a left-wing fringer and yet barely distinguishable from his counterparts on the right. Guess he's just living proof that nuts are pretty much the same no matter where they sit politically.

 

Anyway, (and now, addressing the thread in general) something I meant to ask about in I think it was the Tea Party thread, or some other thread where the UK's NHS came up: I guess then you would count yourself in the 7% who do not rate overall care as "good" or "excellent". Would you in fact agree with Daniel Hannon, whose visit last year to Sean Hannity's show on Fox Noise prompted youtuber and UK resident dprjones to make a

debunking the claims made by both Hannon and Hannity?

 

Not that it's really germane to the discussion anyway. Even with the health care reform bill signed into law, America's health care system is far from socialized.

[Ghogiel]

Looks like Ghogiel has fallen for the left wing myths.

 

And no, I do not try to draw unfounded conclusions about the subject of universal healthcare, because I have lived with it for 50 years. And it's a fine Utopian idea again...that simply doesn't work.

Will you stop saying Universal health care simply does not work.

 

If it does not work, then explain Germany.

[JimboUK]

When did the Conservatives use the police to attack peaceful protesters?

Well they still have their chance!

 

Wasn't police brutality during the 80s a running theme, yes police during thatcher administration is apparently guilty of brutality. and kicked the poo out of pole tax protesters. wasn't there a big thing about this at the time? you can probably pull up news paper articles and all sorts

 

Poll Tax protesters? they were rioting, looting and setting fire to things. I remember them well, peaceful was the last thing they were. It was peaceful protest the killed off the poll tax, the protest was refusal to pay and no one was beaten up for that.

 

 

Will you stop saying Universal health care simply does not work.

 

If it does not work, then explain Germany.

 

It works because it isn't run by the government, it's not been ruined by socialists and their control freakery. They are cutting heathcare spending in Germany anyway along with increasing the tax to pay for it.

[DELiSH]

My entirely personal observation is that Socialism according to the European model is great for everyone. The rich may not need it, but it benefits everyone else. The increase in taxation to pay for it may seem annoying, but in the long run it evens out in many ways. The European model also relies on taxing the rich more than taxing the poor and middle class. This means the rich pay for a large chunk of the services. I'm sure everyone except the very rich are happy about this. They only ever got rich by over charging for something which was produced very cheaply - so in some ways it's rectifying the balance a bit.

 

Of course, the very rich have powerful connections. Especially to the media and lobbyists, even many politicians. So they try to paint an image of how European Socialism will be harmful for everyone (especially the poor), which is a blatant and outright lie. However, as with advertising, if you hear something repeated often enough eventually you regard it as true. The biggest thing these people fear, or should fear, is that the "average" person realizes how much they're being screwed over and used in the grand scheme of things. However since that likely won't happen, there is little fear as well. People are too busy playing games, watching tv or stressing over work, to also become properly politically involved/informed.

 

Both sides in the mainstream media debate are polarized. It's very hard to get straight facts from either side, without them trying to spin it one way or other. I gotta say tho, I prefer the democratic side of the debate to the ultra-cooky stuff from wackos like Glen Beck.

 

In the grand scope of things however, it's pretty easy to see that wealth distribution, in the shape of social services like free college and free hospitals, helps the poor and the middle class. The rich will do everything they can to stop this realization from happening, twisting the idea to scare people, but it still remains a great idea and good principle for a society, and when people don't buy into the scaremongering they see this clearly.

 

IS America becoming Socialist however? Who knows. Much depends on how effective the spin doctoring has been and how the next election turns out. If the republicans get voted in, I think we'll have a few more wars to distract people from their poor economic state, and the socialist aspect will go on the backburner for a while. That is, unless you're a HUGE corporation and you get subsidies from the government. That's already socialism - only for the rich. And that's something republicans will keep working for :)

[monkybuttface]

God, they need to make me president.

 

step 1: HUGE tax on stuff coming in from China

step 2: finish up all military engagements and recall troops

step 3: gigantic cleanup of American government programs

 

 

For everyone else it goes.

 

step 1: Fool people into thinking I know what I am doing.

step 2: Make insane promises I cannot keep but sound really good.

step 3: Pass BS laws that get me reelected but ruin the country five years later

step 4: Sit on solid gold toilet seats and drive a Cadillac, courtesy of American taxpayers

 

 

 

I am a conservative, and this thread seems populated with a s*** load of liberals.

I would probably end up making up my own political party, but I consider myself a Republican (Can't wait till I can vote)

[Ghogiel]

It works because it isn't run by the government, it's not been ruined by socialists and their control freakery.

say what now?

 

care to elaborate?